Top Law Schools

I have offers from Milbank and Shearman and want some advice regarding which firm has better work/life balance and more international work/opportunities to work in an overseas office. I have a general idea of this stuff now, but feel like the firms seem pretty similar and some input would be greatly appreciated.

Neither firm has greater work/life balance. Shearman is more international, but Milbank is more stable.

Fresh Prince wrote:Neither firm has greater work/life balance. Shearman is more international, but Milbank is more stable.

Can you speak more about what makes Milbank more stable? Is it just the layoffs that are rumored to have occurred at Shearman in the early 2000s? Didn't Milbank have some layoffs as well post 2008?

OP. Bump for more input. Also, if you could explain the reasoning for your vote, that would be amazing.

Milbank only offered something like 80% of its class in '09. Shearman was close to 100% but deferred them for a year or two.

as for international opportunities, I think I read on lateral link that Shearman associates can do rotations abroad after spending at least two years in the NYC office. they might be open to it sooner if you ask them. Milbank also seemed pretty open to the idea of working internationally very early on, at least judging from my interaction with them.

with Shearman, I got the impression that you'd be doing more traditional type corporate work overseas like capital markets and M&A. with Milbank, it seemed like you might be working more in project finance deals overseas, not sure how strong they are in cap markets/MA overseas.

I think, with offer in hand, you'd best be served by doing a second visit and asking them specifically about their international practice. fwiw shearman seems to promote its international aspect more openly but whether that actually leads to more international opportunities I don't know.

you might want to do a quick comparison on chambers global and see what bands both firms are strong in in the countries you are potentially interested in.

This thread is relevant to my interests. Also considering an offer from Shearman.

this decision would be a no-brainer if Milbank only updated their lighting and carpet

I'd go with Milbank, much nicer people, high quality of work.

Anonymous User wrote:I'd go with Milbank, much nicer people, high quality of work.

The training at Milbank seems to be a bit better after speaking with people at both firms. I was a little green with envy at the people who got offers from Milbank.

ETA: Went on my cb a while ago at Shearman, associates said they were not very happy

anyone thinking of doing a return/post-offer visit to either of these firms? Do you know if either firm pays for a return visit?

A partner at Milbank essentially told me that I didn't want to go to a TTT in decline like Shearman during my interview when I asked him how he would advise differentiating and choosing between law firms.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:I'd go with Milbank, much nicer people, high quality of work.

The training at Milbank seems to be a bit better after speaking with people at both firms. I was a little green with envy at the people who got offers from Milbank.

ETA: Went on my cb a while ago at Shearman, associates said they were not very happy

+1. Associates looked miserable and I talked to one who implied she had only been able to go out once in two years. Full disclosure: I did not get an offer.

Anonymous User wrote:A partner at Milbank essentially told me that I didn't want to go to a TTT in decline like Shearman during my interview when I asked him how he would advise differentiating and choosing between law firms.

Is it generally consensus that White & Case and Shearman are the two most declining V25s?

lawyerwannabe wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:A partner at Milbank essentially told me that I didn't want to go to a TTT in decline like Shearman during my interview when I asked him how he would advise differentiating and choosing between law firms.

Is it generally consensus that White & Case and Shearman are the two most declining V25s?

Huh, I'm not sure I would trust the statement of a Milbank partner (as there has to be some inherent bias going on there)... I was considering SA offers between Jones Day, Shearman, and Milbank all for NY and in talking to a neutral 3rd party (a private lateral recruiter that I contacted through our schools OCS) the choice she leaned towards was Shearman.

Basically her reasoning was that of course you ignore Vault rankings in that they don't indicate too much, but that in terms of what I'm interested in (NY Corporate Work), Shearman has a decided advantage. She pointed towards both Shearman's clients and also the Chamber's ratings of Elite in M&A and higher Chamber Band rankings in multiple areas over Milbank as the real indicators of a stronger firm. As for Shearman v Jones Day she believed that Shearman NY as a clear headquarters office made it a better choice than Jones Day NY. Also, in talking to associates at all 3 firms I actually got the sense that associates were equally happy at Shearman & Milbank (mutliple Shearman 2nd year associates who had taken full 1-2 week vacations during summer) while Jones Day was more uncertain in terms of firm culture (seemed a lot more formal there).

I was told that Milbank SA class for 2013 is going to around 60, about twice the size of 2012 size. They are confident of 100% offers too. Read that how you will.

lawyerwannabe wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:A partner at Milbank essentially told me that I didn't want to go to a TTT in decline like Shearman during my interview when I asked him how he would advise differentiating and choosing between law firms.

Is it generally consensus that White & Case and Shearman are the two most declining V25s?

What is the justification for saying that S&S is in decline? I've heard stuff here and there on these forums about White & Case, but nothing like that applied to S&S. Is decline just dropping in Vault ranking or economic decline? The two aren't the same.

Anonymous User wrote:

lawyerwannabe wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:A partner at Milbank essentially told me that I didn't want to go to a TTT in decline like Shearman during my interview when I asked him how he would advise differentiating and choosing between law firms.

Is it generally consensus that White & Case and Shearman are the two most declining V25s?

What is the justification for saying that S&S is in decline? I've heard stuff here and there on these forums about White & Case, but nothing like that applied to S&S. Is decline just dropping in Vault ranking or economic decline? The two aren't the same.

Both. Many an amlaw article written on it, too.